--classstrugggle-flipmag CS Mar-2019 MKP - Page 9

intelligentsia. This is a social strata, not a class, outside of the working class and the petty bourgeoisie, but with ties to the different social classes in a given society and social system. With the development of the productive forces and the increased demand for a better educated labour force, and with improved possibilities of education, this group has increased significantly. Like the labour aristocracy, the intelligentsia as a social stratum may be subdivided into three main categories, according to their class affiliations. A large part of the lowest layer of intellectuals is more and more proletarianised. This means that their life and working conditions increasingly resemble those of the working class in general, no matter whether they are privately or publicly employed. This also means that they are very harassed and have uncertain work conditions, low wages and attrition. This is true of large profe- ssions like school and kindergarten teachers, nurses and others. During recent years public employees have waged strong struggles for their demands or have been locked out by their employers in the state apparatus, local regions and communities. This was the case with the lockout of the teachers and the closing of public schools in 2013, when a social democratic led government sent the teachers home and closed the schools. As this did not break the fighting spirit of the teachers, they passed legislation making the employers’ demands the law. The public employers are the same as the (elected) politicians on different levels. The lower ranks of the intellectuals – such as students in general – are close allies of the working class, and in times of acute class struggle many of them are won to the side of the workers. Feb, March - 2019 The upper part of academic top officials, the highest echelons of the judicial and executive power, the CEOs of public enterprises – as for instance managers of hospitals and universities – are socially entwined with the bourgeoisie, with whom they share conditions. This upper quite swollen layer serves the interests of the ruling class unconditionally. Between these two groups are several categories of people who have not made it to the top of society, but who may one day be the right hand of the boss; the next have a time limited project employment, and the third be unemployed with a big debt. They struggle for career and position, a situation they share with parts of the petty bourgeoisie. Due to their objective conditions of life and work the intelligentsia has no independent class position, but has some specific features making it susceptible to opportunism, and at times to waver between the main classes of capitalist society, the bourgeoisie and the working class. This is true of its individualism and the fact that knowledge in capitalism is a private value, an asset in the opportunist competition for jobs and career, or else used as private property. This also means a certain susceptibility to illusions and an inclination towards the easy way. Thus petty bourgeois intellectuals along with labour aristocrats may spread opportunist and reformist ideas and theories in the workers’ movement, and indeed also in the communist party. On the other hand, revolutionary intellectuals who join the working class and its cause are of great importance to the struggle of the proletariat and its party. The communist movement is and has been joined by many great revolutionary intellectuals and outstanding cultural figures who have used their creative powers to advance the working class struggle for socialism. The communist party lives and fights in the midst of bourgeois society, at all times surrounded and attacked by furious anticommunist or anti-revolutionary propaganda and by the hostile activities of its enemies. It is a part of the existing society and is in touch with and affected by the social classes and strata of this society. Therefore the question of the class composition of the party is so important, making it imperative to secure a decisive majority of workers in the ranks of the party. ™ April, 2018 Homage to Mrinal Sen Mrinal Sen was born in Faridpur district, East Bengal. Rudolf Arnheim’s “Film as Art”, a book on film aesthetics, created in him theoretical interest in cinema. From 1943 to 1947, he was involved with the Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA). The long and glittering trajectory of Mrinal’s films stretches from “Raatbhore” (1955) to “Amar Bhuvan” (2002). Mrinal followed the Italian communist Elio Vittarini’s dictum of the 1940s : “The point is not to pocket the truth, but to chase the truth”. Being a Marxist, Mrinal was close to the people and the poor. His films were marked by political analysis, protests and a study of the socio-economic conditions. The political quartet emerged with “Interview” (1971), where a man loses his job as he cannot afford to buy a suit. “Calcutta 71” (1972) studies 40 years in the history of social deprivation, told with Brechtian rigour. “Padatik” (1973) makes an analysis of the extreme left. “Chorus” (1974) with a surfeit of barbed wires and police in uniform, cries out against repression. Along with his contemporaries like Satyajit Ray and Ritwik Ghatak, Mrinal built up the parallel cinema in India. The”Class Struggle” pays revolutionary homage to Mrinal Sen. ™ 9